Just What is the Holy Spirit?

dear steve britt,

there you are wrong again. The bible clearly called jesus also child of the Holy Ghost in matt. 1.18; for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost Matt. 1.20. This is because God is a spirit and whatever the Holy spirit does is considered done by God himself. We do not understand God and his way, that's why we keep on going the wrong way. The manner by which God wells among us is by the Holy Ghost, he speaks to us by the holy ghost and we experience him by the holy ghost. Lo iam with you always: This is only possible through the holy spirit.

your second mistake is to think because Jesus was filled with the holy ghost, the holy ghost cannot be God. Remember same jesus was filled with the father as well. For the father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the father and in Jesus dwells the fullness of Godhead

you mistakenly said that jesus never paid attention to the Holy Spirit. It is because you have not known the father. The holy spirit was to take from what belong to jesus and to glorify jesus even as christ had glorified the father.

blessings

the understanding of the bible should help you know that there is no differeciating in Godhead. Because of this many err concerning the truth thinking Jesus is both the Father and the Sohn and the holy spirit. Jesus said he who has seen me has seen the father. I and the father are one. When you talk about the holy spirit you are talking about God. Jesus became the sohn of God when he became flesh. He was egual with the father from the beginnig. The mystery of humanbeing should help you understand God a bit - man consist of the body and of the soul and of the spirit. all the three element is part of man. anything a part does is condered to be done by the man. yet each of the part are different and are co-existenz. Incase of God everything about him is life. By this you will understand the mystery of God. Then the man was created in the image of God.

The bible even at some places called Jesus "The Spirit" who had been with the children of the Isreal to indicate to you the oneness of the Godhead. The dinstictiveness of the Godhead is this that the sohn was manifest to take the sin of whole world. To live a life to show us a step to follow.

A man of logical thinking would easily understand this. Your problem seems to be that Jesus was reffering to the father and not to the holy ghost. Now considered those who are born again - they were said to be born of the spirit and to be born of God. if you have read my earlier posting you would have understood the uniqueness and oneness of God - there is only one God, not three Gods - and the prophecy of the old testament reffered to him as everlasting father, mighty God - what about this - does this make jesus the father?

many have the problem because the council trent affirmed trinity and because they felt it is not biblical. understand the word as it is used. The word is latin, because the people at the time spoke latin. The bible was written in greek and hebrew. but the idea had always existed in the bible. it is all about three who is one in Godhead.

dear LenaVanAusdleand

what about Jesus? He is also the word of God. Do you believe him to have be one with the father and to have share same glory with the father even before the foundation of the world?

Absolutely I believe that Jesus Christ was/is the Word, and with God since begore the foundation of the earth, but believing in the divinity of Christ has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit being a separate being. The Holy Spirit is the very power of God given to those who repent and are baptized!

A)If the Holy Spirit is not a person, you couldn't commit a sin against a non-person. But Jesus specifically said:

And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

B) If the Holy Spirit is not a person, Jesus will not send the Paraclete/Counselor to the Apostles that can "convince the world of sin and of righteousness and of judgement ......guide you into all the truth...whatever he hears he will speak and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you."

Key attributes of being a person: convince the world, guide, hears, speak, glorify etc. What else do you need to show that the Holy Spirit is indeed a person?

Thanks for your comments. Look carefully at the three verses you quote. Do you realize that they actually disprove the Trinity? If God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are all co-equal as God as the Trinity doctrine teaches, why would speaking against the Son be forgiven, but speaking against the Holy Spirit not be forgiven? This simple fact shows that Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit cannot be co-equal beings.

This should clearly raise questions about your assumptions.

A basic principle to understanding the Bible is to view unclear passages in the light of clear passages. To believe the Holy Spirit is a personal being, one must elevate many vague scriptures over many clear ones—such as the many verses that describe the relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son, but which completely omit mention of the Holy Spirit (see, for example, Matthew 26:39, Mark 13:32; 15:34; John 5:18, 22, John 10:30, Romans 1:7, 1 Corinthians 1:3, 8:6, 2 Corinthians 1:2, Galatians 1:3, Ephesians 1:2, Philippians 1:2, Colossians 1:2, 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2 Thessalonians 1:1-2, 1 Timothy 1:2, Titus 1:4, Philemon 3, 1 John 1:3, Acts 7:55-56).

Bible scholars have long recognized that nonpersonal things are sometimes described in Scripture in personal ways or as having personlike activities. To cite some examples:

In Genesis 4:10, blood is described as having a “voice” that “cries out” from the ground. Clearly this is figurative language, since blood has no voice and cannot speak.

In Proverbs:1:20-21, wisdom is described as calling aloud and crying out. Proverbs 8 describes wisdom as crying out, standing on a high hill, calling to men, speaking, having lips and a mouth, loving and being loved, having children and having accompanied and rejoiced with God. Yet obviously wisdom is not a person and does none of these things in a literal sense.

In Psalm 65:13 valleys are described as shouting and singing.

In Psalm 96:11-12, heavens are said to rejoice, fields as being joyful, and trees said to rejoice.

In Psalm 98:8 hills are said to rejoice and floods and rivers to clap their hands.

Psalm 148:4-5 describes the skies and rain praising God.

In Isaiah 3:26 gates are said to mourn and lament.

In Isaiah:14:8 trees are said to rejoice.

Isaiah 35:1 ascribes emotions to the wilderness and says the desert will rejoice.

Isaiah 44:23 and 49:13 describe mountains, forests, trees and the heavens singing.

Isaiah 55:12 says that hills will break into singing and trees will clap their hands.

In Habakkuk 2:11 stones and timbers are described as talking to each other.

We find similar personifications of nonpersonal things in the New Testament. For example, Matthew:11:19 speaks of wisdom having children.

Romans 6 says that sin enslaves and reigns over human beings (verses 6, 12, 16).

In Romans 10:6, righteousness is described as speaking.

In 1 John 5:8 water and blood are said to testify and agree.

Clearly none of these things happen literally. At times the Bible similarly applies such figurative language to the Holy Spirit, ascribing activity to it as though it were a person. Yet the Bible also describes the Holy Spirit in ways that clearly show it is not a person.

For example, it is referred to as a gift (Acts 10:45; 1 Timothy 4:14) that God gives without limit (John 3:34, NIV). We are told that the Holy Spirit can be quenched (1 Thessalonians 5:19), that it can be poured out on people (Acts 2:17, 33), and that we are baptized with it (Matthew 3:11).

People can drink of it (John 7:37-39), partake of it (Hebrews 6:4) and be filled with it (Acts 2:4; Ephesians 5:18). The Holy Spirit also renews us (Titus 3:5) and must be stirred up within us (2 Timothy 1:6). These impersonal characteristics are certainly not attributes of a person or personal being!

The Spirit is also described by other designations—”the Holy Spirit of promise,” “the guarantee of our inheritance” and “the spirit of wisdom and revelation” (Ephesians 1:13-14, 17)—that show it is not a person.

In contrast to God the Father and Jesus Christ, who are consistently compared to human beings in Their form and shape, the Holy Spirit is consistently represented, by various symbols and manifestations, in a completely different manner—such as breath (John 20:22), wind (Acts 2:2), fire (verse 3), water (John 4:14; 7:37-39), oil (Psalm 45:7; compare Acts 10:38; Matthew 25:1-10), a dove (Matthew 3:16) and an “earnest,” or down payment, on eternal life (2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians:1:13-14, KJV).

To say the least, these depictions are difficult to understand if the Holy Spirit is a person!

As even the New Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges: “The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God. When a quasi-personal activity is ascribed to God’s spirit, e.g., speaking, hindering, desiring, dwelling (Acts 8.29; 16.7; Rom[ans] 8.9), one is not justified in concluding immediately that in these passages God’s spirit is regarded as a Person; the same expressions are used also in regard to rhetorically personified things or abstract ideas . . . In Acts, the use of the words ‘Holy Spirit,’ with or without an article, is rich and abundant. However, again, it is difficult to demonstrate personality from the texts” (2003, Vol. 13, “Spirit, Holy,” p. 428).

All of this only scratches the surface of the subject. I’d suggest you download and read our booklet "Is God a Trinity?" to learn how the belief in the Holy Spirit as a person can to be accepted and viewed as part of a Trinity. It’s one of history’s great mysteries! You can download or request the booklet at www.ucg.org/booklet/god-trinity.

I hope this helps.

Jesus says to baptise in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. He could have said baptise in the Name of the Father and of the Son only, but he didn't. It would be really odd if he said baptise in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Power of God.

True, Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible. Neither is the word "Bible" in the Bible.

There have been controversies over the Trinity doctrine over the centuries and I don't expect that to disappear any time soon. However, the Early Church Fathers understood it and I am not spiritually inspired to come up with a private interpretation 2000 years later. So I'll stick with the early Church Fathers understanding.

Steven, the Spirit of God is "independently existing (whatever it means)" right at the beginning. Genesis 1. "and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters".

I have shown the Holy Spirit the attributes of a being and you have done the reverse. I believe Jehovah Witness also regard the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force. So you may something in common there. So I'll leave it at that.

The verses I quote does not prove inequality either. Unless you mean equality to being a clone. The Father is not the Son and the Son , is not the Father. So does that make them equal or unequal? I am not even sure when humans gives a label to God, it even matters. Christ always put his Father first for example but that does not make him "unequal".

Dear Mr Ashley,

I am afraid you are treating out of context. You quoted some passges in the bible where personification are used without regarding the context out of which they came.

For example blood is always associated with the spirit of man, and the water with the flesh. So when blood is said to have spoken. It is the spirit of man that is refered to.

Many of the personification you made mention are common to literature and are considered figurative narration.

But if you will considered those things said of the Holy Spirit and when they were said - you will quite understand that they were not said in figurative speech but in clear word to depict the very works of the Holy Spirit. You got yourself confused because Jesus always refered to the father and not at the sametime both the father and the holy spirit. Is there any reason why jesus should always refered to the Father and the Holy spirit together. The conversation here was only about the relationship of the jesus to the father. Does dis make the holy spirit to be non- existing.

Trinity is latin word - the bible language was greek and hebrew. This does not mean that the early church did not preach on trinity. In the Paul 1st letter to the corinthian 12.4-7 Paul clearly wrote on the Spirit , Lord and God. The whole new testament is full of Godhead.

Many claimed that the writting of John in Ijon5.7. was adulterated. How do they know that and where is the evidence. No one has been able to produce any original writting of John where this was not included. The translators of King James Version did a good job without any theological bias. Their works were reviewed by another scholars without any denominational prejudice. How come about some claiming that some verses were not in the orignal if not because of denominational fallacy.

People are found of blasphemy God by reducing holy spirit to his works - like saying holy spirit is power or gift - is that what the bible says about holy spirit - it is so disturbing to read posting from people who have not done a little bit of thinking.

Maybe you have forgotten that all figuratives ascribed to the Holy Ghost were also in other places ascribed to the Father and to the Sohn.

Tenderlove,

Our understanding is that God (meaning Christ and the Father collectively) is one (Deuteronomy 6:4) in the same sense that a married couple is one flesh (Genesis 2:24).

We have much respect for the Spirit of God! It is the power of God which lives in us, and the very means by which we are able to transform our lives and live in a way that is pleasing to God the Father! We simply don't see any justification for the claim that this Spirit has its own sense of self-awareness. Throughout the Old Testament, God refers to it as "My Spirit," or it is called the "Spirit of God," as something that belongs to God. Are you aware that every instance in the New Testament where the Holy Spirit is referred to as "He," "who," or "whom" is a blatant mistranslation and twisting of scripture? Greek words have a gender associated with them - either male, female, or neutral. The New Testament does not assign a gender to the Holy Spirit! Therefore, the actual text should be correctly translated as "it" or "which" instead of "He" or "who." This deliberate error by the translators, who were biased because they already believed the Spirit to be a person, has caused a lot of unnecessary confusion.

Also, as I've stated before, if the Spirit is a person, then the Spirit must be Christ's Father, since Christ was conceived in Mary by the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:18-20). This is directly contrary to numerous statements of Christ that the Father is His father.

You've actually made the point for me when you said "Do you call the spirit of man to be the power of man or his strength. In that case the weak man should have no spirit at all."

You agree that there is a spirit in man that each of us has. You have a spirit in you, and I have a spirit in me. That spirit is not a SEPARATE entity from you - it is instead a PART of your existence. In the same way, the Holy Spirit is not its own entity, which is what the trinity claims, but it is in fact a part of God's existence.

We know that the Word is separate from the Father because the Word became flesh and existed on earth independently of the Father (i.e. meaning that Christ had feelings, thoughts, and experiences that were His own and not the Father's.)

Again, you've made my point for me when you say "if the Spirit and the Father are one, why should there be any difference as to whom Jesus referred to?" Since the Spirit was clearly what impregnated Mary, then it follows that IF the Spirit is a separate "person" or entity as the trinity doctrine claims, then it would be the entity that fathered Christ, and not the Father.

Also, just because a word doesn't have a gender doesn't mean it's not a noun and can't assume a pronoun. In fact, that's exactly what the pronoun "it" is for - it substitutes for a genderless noun.

Where has it ever been said in the bible that the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son as the Son glorifies the Father? I think you are imposing your own personal ideas about this rather than trying to understand what the scripture says from scripture itself.

I have known for a long time that the holy spirit was not a personal being, but was at a loss as to defining exactly what it was. This artical has been a blessing, thank you!!!

The fact that the holy spirit is nameless should be a dead give-away. Even Satan has a name!

tenderlove,

What scripture do you use to support your assertion that the Holy Spirit has "life in himself" (or "in itself," as I would render it)? The Spirit is never identified as God the way that the Word is in John 1.

You wrote, "Before the Word became flesh do you know his feelings, thought and experience and whether they were different to his father?"

We know that no one has seen the Father or heard His voice (John 6:46). So who did Israel hear at Mt. Sinai who said, "I am the LORD your God who brought you up out of the land of Egypt" (Exodus 20:2)? It was Christ, who clearly identified Himself to the Pharisees in John 8:58 as the one who had said to their forefathers, "I AM THAT I AM." So, to answer your question, I can say with certainty that YES their experiences were different before the Word became flesh: the Word had spoken audibly to man but the Father had not.

Also, you said "the pronoun "it" is never used to substitute a genderless noun. It is used for neutral and there is no genderless noun."

"Neuter" is the word I was actually looking for when I said "genderless," but it really doesn't change the point that I made. The word used for the Holy Spirit in the NT is a neuter noun, meaning that the pronouns used should indeed be "it" rather than "he."

Lastly, you describe a 3-part composition of man. I believe you're referring to Genesis 2:7. Actually, it says that man was formed from the dust, had the breath of life breathed in, and that he then "became a living soul." It does not say that God affixed a third component to make it complete, rather it says that he WAS a living soul as a result of the union of the dust and breath. Furthermore, the word used there for "soul" is "nephesh," which also describes the existence of animals (it's translated as "creature" in Genesis 1:21).

It is commonly acknowledged by academics that I John 5:7 was added at a later date. There is plenty of evidence - the scripture is found in the Latin translations, but does not appear in the much earlier Greek translations. I know I can't post links here, but do a quick search and the lingiustic evidence is there. Even look up trinity in Wikipedia and it will tell you!

Many respected Biblical scholars admit that there is no Biblical basis for the trinity. And yet they still believe and teach it. Here's a couple of quotes I have copied, which are included in UCG's booklet on the trinity. There are hundreds more!

The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism states: "Today, however, scholars generally agree that there is no doctrine of the Trinity as such in either the OT [ Old Testament ] or the NT [ New Testament ] . . . It would go far beyond the intention and thought-forms of the OT to suppose that a late-fourth-century or thirteenth-century Christian doctrine can be found there . . . Likewise, the NT does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity" (Richard McBrien, general editor, 1995, "God," pp. 564-565).

Professor Charles Ryrie, in his respected work Basic Theology, writes: "Many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the Scripture for which there are no proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this. It is fair to say that the Bible does not clearly teach the doctrine of the Trinity . . . In fact, there is not even one proof text, if by proof text we mean a verse or passage that 'clearly' states that there is one God who exists in three persons" (1999, p. 89).

Ryrie goes on to state: "The above illustrations prove the fallacy of concluding that if something is not proof texted in the Bible we cannot clearly teach the results . . . If that were so, I could never teach the doctrine of the Trinity" (p. 90).

Hi Born Again Lee,

God's Name is Yahwee meaning I am that I am but this name belongs to every member of Godhead. The father could claim it, the sohn could claim it and the spirit could claim it. No one can explain the mystery of Godhead.

Jesus was only his earthly name. The name Jesus is common during his day.

In OT Jesus was called counselor. The Holy spirit is counselor.

In NT jesus was called truth. The Holy Spirit is truth

I want to add some minor clarifications to Laura Rowles explanation of 1 John 5:7. The extraneous text does not appear in all Latin translations. It is not in Jerome's Vulgate (405) or the Nova Vulgate (1979). It is found in the Clemetine Vulgate (1592).

The extraneous text also appears in some of the late Greek manuscripts. It is found in the Textus Receptus, but it is not in the earlier Tischendorf text.

SATIN IS HIS NAME, AND SUBTLETY IS HIS GAME: A COMMENTARY ON LAURA ROWLES’ JUSTIFICATION FOR TEACHING THE TRINITY DOCTRINE

From the beginning of time, the adversary has devised tactics to blur the distinction between truth and error. Teaching a man-made doctrine seems harmless; but then, so did eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Just because “many respected Biblical scholars” teach a thing does not make it true. In their day, the Pharisees were respected Biblical scholars yet Jesus aptly described them as blind guides (Matthew 15:12-14).

Your sources justify teaching a Trinitarian worldview because they presuppose that the Bible is either silent or implicit on the matter. They are mistaken: The Bible is neither silent nor implicit about the nature of the Holy Spirit.

In Luke 24:49 Jesus said, “I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.” We know from Acts 1:4,5 that that power was the Holy Spirit, “On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: ‘Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’”

Note that Luke 24:49 and Acts 1:4,5 are parallel statements. So, in Jesus’ own words, the Holy Spirit is the power of God. And, the message is clear and explicit. To teach otherwise is an error.

Tenderlove - I am not debating whether this verse defines the trinity or not. The academic accuracy of a statement made that this verse is not included in the original texts was disputed. The vast majority of people agree that it is not included. Also the quote you were criticising did not come from me - it is a quote from The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism. And Catholics should know, seeing as they invented the trinity.

Lee, I don't think that you have understood me. I definitely DO NOT believe in the trinity. The trinity has no basis in the bible, and should therefore not be taught. I quoted the sources that I did to show the illogical nature of how the trinity doctrine is taught - no where did i endorse this method of teaching! Please read my post again. I find it utterly incomprehensible that people will admit that the trinity is not biblical, and that they do not understand it, and yet they are willing to hold this as a key doctrine.

Mr Born Again Lee,

I am really surprised how some people could not understand what is so clear in the scripture.

your believing or disbelieving God does nothing to him. If we deny him, he will deny us. If we do not believe him, he still remained faithful and he will not deny himself. Calling God what he did not call himself or adjusting the bible to your own taste does not change the standard of the word of God.

Jesus says "But you shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come on you" (Acts 1.8) I have explained often here that the Holy Ghost is not the power but the power comes from the holy ghost. Hence the bible calls it the power of the Holy Ghost. Nowhere do you find it in the bible, where God personified power as something personal. But he personified the WORD and the SPIRIT. You will find God in the WORD and the SPIRIT but not in the power. Power comes from the WORD and the SPIRIT. Think about Elijah's encounter with God. Many great manifestation took place but God was not in there.

Mind you, Pharises were blind not because they were teaching the Law of Moses but because they were manipulating it and twisting it to their own destruction. I have read here so many insulting phrases to the Spirit of God.

you write "Your sources justify teaching a Trinitarian worldview because they presuppose that the Bible is either silent or implicit on the matter". They are mistaken: The Bible is neither silent nor implicit about the nature of the Holy Spirit.

Bible is neither silent nor passive on the three personalities in Godhead. "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host."(Ps 33:6]

Here it is clear that the WORD and the SPIRIT are in action to creat the heavens and their host:
The Word = Jesus
The breath= Holy Ghost

Remember it was Jesus who made the father known to us. In the old testament people knew that there is God, who is mightý and powerful but could not understand him. They were even afraid to call his name, they respected the law, Moses gave them but knew no God. Only the prophet by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost could see into the realm of the spirit to know that there is the Word and the Spirit.
The Word and the Spirit were very present in the bible. Each time we have encouter with the word and the spirit, we understand that we do have encounter with God. Bible is very on this.